SUPREME COURT Receiving charges denied

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33783, 4 March 1975, Page 10

SUPREME COURT Receiving charges denied

The trial of Graeme Frederick Emms, aged 38, a selfemployed salesman, on 12 charges of receiving property valued at $3380.95 when he knew that it had been dishonestly obtained, began in the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr Justice Roper and a jury. Mr G. K. Panckhurst appears for the Crown and Mr M. A. Bungay, of Wellington. for Emms, who has pleaded not guiky to all charges. The trial is expected to take two days. Opening his case jyir Panckhurst said that Emms was charged with receiving nipe television sets, electronic equipment, a radio cassette player and a brief case. These articles were stolen in house burglaries between April and August, 1974. The goods were recovered on August 13 and 14 when the police executed search warrants on four dwellings owned or leased by Emms, who rented them to tenants. Some of the property was found in a wardrobe and a locked shed. Emms had flats throughout the city. Emms was questioned by the police on November 14 and 20. He said that he had been purchasing television sets for his flats after putting advertisements in a newspaper. Emms strongly denied that he knew the property was stolen when he purchased it. It was acknowledged by the Crown that there was no direct evidence that Emms knew the property was stolen. The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence — the volume of property involved, the short time before it arrived in Emms’s hands

after it was stolen, the places where it was concealed, and the low price at which it was purchased. Evidence would be given by an employee of the “Christchurch Star” of the Jack of evidence of Emms having placed advertisements for television sets. | ‘‘The Crown says that this iman was actively involved lin receiving stolen property and that the evidence of this ;is irresistible,” Mr Panckjhurst said.